The government has finally published the wording of its amendment to its own schools bill, which will require academies to observe minimum pay rates and have “regard” to other national conditions.
Ministers have also pledged to remove maximum pay rates for local authority maintained schools after the bill is passed.

Bridget Phillipson and her team have faced criticism over the original wording of the children’s wellbeing and schools bill, which would have extended national pay and conditions – including pay scales – to academies.
Trusts that currently use their flexibilities to offer salaries above national rates had warned they would not be able to continue to do so if the law was enacted.
Schools minister Catherine McKinnell announced last Tuesday that the government would amend the bill to “create a floor with no ceiling”.
What the amendment says
The amendment would give the education secretary the power to issue an order “requiring the remuneration of an academy teacher to be at least equal to the amount specified in, or determined in accordance with, the order”.
This will apply to those providing “primary or secondary education under a contract of employment” with the proprietor of an academy or the principal of an academy, but not an executive leader of its trust.
Where a trust also runs a 16 to 19 academy, teachers will not be considered academy teachers “to the extent that a contract of employment or for services between [the teacher] and the proprietor requires [the teacher] to provide secondary education at the 16 to 19 academy”.
The amendment also states that “in determining the conditions of employment or service of an academy teacher, the relevant proprietor must have regard to any provision of an order…that relates to conditions of employment or service”.
Academies will need ‘good reason’ not to follow conditions
In a policy update, the Department for Education said the amendment “will allow the secretary of state to require academy schools and alternative provision academies to pay teachers at least a minimum level of remuneration set out in secondary legislation”.
“This will be set at the same level as applies to maintained schools, through the School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document (STPCD) each time it is updated, creating a consistent floor on pay for all state schools.”

The measure will also “require academy schools and alternative provision academies to have regard to the whole of the STPCD in determining the pay and conditions of their teachers”.
“This means they must follow it unless they have a good reason not to. This will ensure an established foundation for all schools, while giving confidence that existing or future changes which benefit teachers and pupils will be able to continue.”
The government added that it’s “our subsequent reforms to the STPCD, which will happen through secondary legislation using our existing powers, will remove the maximum of the pay bands for maintained schools and provide additional flexibilities to enable healthy competition and innovation.”
Neil O’Brien, the shadow education minister, said the opposition would “check if [the amendment] works”.
He said the Conservatives would now “push to get the same freedoms” for teachers in maintained schools and for support staff.
I am appalled at the level of payment that academy leaders often receive . Whilst working for a government funded charity I became acquainted with very young inexperienced-generally men- who had spent time with PWC before spending a little time in schools-generally through the Teach First route. These young people began to be advisors to people working with the aforementioned charity who had spent many years teaching in schools , their confidence and self -belief was breathtaking, many of these bright young things were precipitated into leadership roles in schools without gaining the necessary experience/knowledge linked to empathy. Since retirement I have witnessed, as a governor, the performance of executive headteachers/principals on exorbitant salaries ,whose actual role was beyond my understanding. These individuals would constantly monopolise meetings generally making statements that were redundant and usually reiteration of what the perfectly capable headteachers had proposed. I have read of executive leaders “saving” schools and being the instrument of removal of perfectly capable headteachers because of poor Ofsted reports -but only after the inspection has taken place. I watch with despair these examples of “outstanding ” leaders and read of their salaries.
The current curriculum is failing so many children and young people ,more retired teachers and leaders should be invited to help the government bring about change. Inflated results set in a restricted curriculum do not necessarily reflect a school’s overall performance. Constantly publishing pictures of gurning headteachers and leaping children advertising their outstanding /good schools does little to support schools in general, It has a detrimental effect on teachers .
The government -which I support-is preparing to rid the NHS of so many of its so called highly paid managers-the same should be happening in education